Sham transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) approaches are widely used in basic and clinical research to ensure that observed effects are due to the intended neural manipulation instead of being caused by various possible side effects. We here critically discuss several methodological aspects of sham TMS. Importantly, we propose to carefully distinguish between the placebo versus sensory side effects of TMS. In line with this conceptual distinction, we describe current limitations of sham TMS approaches in the context of placebo effects and blinding success, followed by a short review of our own work demonstrating that the sensory side effects of sham TMS are not unspecific as often falsely assumed. Lastly, we argue that sham TMS approaches are inherently insufficient as full-fledged control conditions as they fail to demonstrate the specificity of TMS effects to a particular brain area or time point of stimulation. Sham TMS should therefore only complement alternative control strategies in TMS research.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,818,225
of 24,456,171 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,441
of 32,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,309
of 259,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#121
of 434 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,456,171 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,953 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 259,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 434 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
